SA Footy

Is there any merit in a system (used in Adelaide Turf Cricket) where instead of the two Grand Final teams being promoted - the minor premier and the premiers are promoted. In the event of the minor premier winning the flag, the other grand finalist is promoted.

This rewards a club for consistent achievement in the grade they are in, plus the team that finishes off their season well.

For example - let's use Div 2

PNU - minor premier - promoted to Div 1, but loses both finals.
Broadview and Eastern Park play in Grand Final - winner goes through to Div 1

It could avoid a situation where a club has a massive run from third, fourth or fifth to make the Grand Final, but gets walloped the next year because they aren't prepared.

Or is the current system suitable?

ezydoesitbigfella wrote:Is there any merit in a system (used in Adelaide Turf Cricket) where instead of the two Grand Final teams being promoted - the minor premier and the premiers are promoted. In the event of the minor premier winning the flag, the other grand finalist is promoted.

This rewards a club for consistent achievement in the grade they are in, plus the team that finishes off their season well.

For example - let's use Div 2

PNU - minor premier - promoted to Div 1, but loses both finals.
Broadview and Eastern Park play in Grand Final - winner goes through to Div 1

It could avoid a situation where a club has a massive run from third, fourth or fifth to make the Grand Final, but gets walloped the next year because they aren't prepared.

Or is the current system suitable?

No if you go out in straight sets bad luck, better luck next year, going up divisions should be tough, hard work. Right throughout the full season, which extends through to the finals.

IF you want to go down that line then do away with finals and just give the cup to the team that was most consistent throughout the year...

Very good idea. I think this the way the A League works to decide Asian Championship spots.
Teams should be rewarded for being the best team over 18 weeks, not just over 3 or 4 weeks

I think it is a good idea. But the way the system is now is not that bad. Good topic for discussion.

I think the end result can change year to year. If you look at DIV 1 this year and the sides that came up last year the side that stays up came from 4th and the Premier is relegated.

I don't mind the idea at all for what it's worth.

Jabber wrote:No if you go out in straight sets bad luck, better luck next year, going up divisions should be tough, hard work. Right throughout the full season, which extends through to the finals.

IF you want to go down that line then do away with finals and just give the cup to the team that was most consistent throughout the year...

Kind of self defeating point there Jabber - going up divisions is tough - and being a consistent performer is tough - shouldn't you be rewarded for that? What about a team that dominates throughout the year (undefeated maybe) but has a bad run with injuries or illness that decimate their finals plans - some consideration there?

And the second point makes no sense at all - still need a premiership final series.

What happens when the top four are pretty even going into the major rounds? It would be more unfair to deny a team promotion when they've only finished a game or two below top spot after the minor rounds, yet have performed better in finals.

ezydoesitbigfella wrote:

Jabber wrote:No if you go out in straight sets bad luck, better luck next year, going up divisions should be tough, hard work. Right throughout the full season, which extends through to the finals.

IF you want to go down that line then do away with finals and just give the cup to the team that was most consistent throughout the year...

Kind of self defeating point there Jabber - going up divisions is tough - and being a consistent performer is tough - shouldn't you be rewarded for that? What about a team that dominates throughout the year (undefeated maybe) but has a bad run with injuries or illness that decimate their finals plans - some consideration there?

And the second point makes no sense at all - still need a premiership final series.

No you don't need it at all, your wanting to reward the most consistant performing side, so why waste time with finals?

The thing about a flag is you can be the best side all year but to win a flag you also need luck, thats what makes it so special, and going up a division is exactly the same.

Plympton are desperate to get back into div 4 next week, they say next week because win against pulteney we're in div 4, thats a win for the club, then if they win the gf, thats a win for the players.

Quichey wrote:What happens when the top four are pretty even going into the major rounds? It would be more unfair to deny a team promotion when they've only finished a game or two below top spot after the minor rounds, yet have performed better in finals.

This same logic applies (particularly this year in Div 1) at the relegation end of the table. Or in the middle (as in Div 4 with Golden Grove missing finals by 0.7%)

And if there are four teams pretty close - that's not a bad thing - means the competition is healthy and tough - this system rewards the best performed team across the year, and the best team in the finals.

You could present arguments all day about "what if this...what if that" - in either system - but I think this is fairer.

Jabber wrote:No you don't need it at all, your wanting to reward the most consistant performing side, so why waste time with finals?

The thing about a flag is you can be the best side all year but to win a flag you also need luck, thats what makes it so special, and going up a division is exactly the same.

Plympton are desperate to get back into div 4 next week, they say next week because win against pulteney we're in div 4, thats a win for the club, then if they win the gf, thats a win for the players.

Rewarding the most consistent side is a good thing - but the Finals series in another - the argument that this negates the need to have a finals series is just stupid. Of course you need a finals series.

So in your grade - Pulteney are rewarded for being the most consistent and best performed team in the home and away series, and Plympton (if successful) are rewarded two fold - a premiership and a promotion (win for the players AND win for the club). It wouldn't change your situation.

I really can't see your point.

Quichey wrote:What happens when the top four are pretty even going into the major rounds? It would be more unfair to deny a team promotion when they've only finished a game or two below top spot after the minor rounds, yet have performed better in finals.

If they have performed better the chances are they'd make the GF anyhow and get promoted.

The Amateur league, like the EPL, is a true indication who has been the best team throughout the year by having a true Home & Away season. With such a promotion in place it would create a win at all costs attitude all year round as every game is a must win and it would create finals type games in the normal season with such a prize on the line, perhaps enhancing the quality of football in some grades.
At the end of the day you and your club still play to win a flag, it's an added incentive to perform week in week out for 18 weeks. Good topic

There is a major difference between ATCA and SAAFL. ATCA has 12 team comps and only 4 finalists with only two semi finals to determine who goes into GF. The are no second chances should you lose a semi, it's cut-throat, so rewarding the minor premier is probably justified

I'd prefer to see the top team at the end of the minor round get the nod to go up regardless. This puts even more at stake in the GF if the minor premier goes out in straight sets.
It's harder to play well for 18 rounds than what it is for 3 or 4 weeks, if a team suffers an exceptionally large amounts of injuries in the finals it's a bit of injustice for the hard yards put in during the season.

Mr Beefy wrote:There is a major difference between ATCA and SAAFL. ATCA has 12 team comps and only 4 finalists with only two semi finals to determine who goes into GF. The are no second chances should you lose a semi, it's cut-throat, so rewarding the minor premier is probably justified

Very good point.

i wouldnt be against minor premiers being promoted because chances are they deserve to be promoted. however i think the chance to make a grand final (and being promoted) with winning only one finals match is enough reward for finishing first. also i think it would make finals footy a little less exciting

ezydoesitbigfella wrote:Is there any merit in a system (used in Adelaide Turf Cricket) where instead of the two Grand Final teams being promoted - the minor premier and the premiers are promoted. In the event of the minor premier winning the flag, the other grand finalist is promoted.

This rewards a club for consistent achievement in the grade they are in, plus the team that finishes off their season well.

For example - let's use Div 2

PNU - minor premier - promoted to Div 1, but loses both finals.
Broadview and Eastern Park play in Grand Final - winner goes through to Div 1

It could avoid a situation where a club has a massive run from third, fourth or fifth to make the Grand Final, but gets walloped the next year because they aren't prepared.

Or is the current system suitable?

Just one question.

What if at the end of the finals series the Grand Final winner and the minor round premier are the same club????

Rotter wrote:Just one question.

What if at the end of the finals series the Grand Final winner and the minor round premier are the same club????

The losing Grand Finalist goes up.

ezydoesitbigfella wrote:

Rotter wrote:Just one question.

What if at the end of the finals series the Grand Final winner and the minor round premier are the same club????

The losing Grand Finalist goes up.

The same way it is now?

I like it the way it is at the moment, the minor premier only need to win one game in the finals to go up anyway. If they can't win one more game then they don't deserve to go up, they should be consistent over 22 weeks and not just 18.

Devalues the finals a little bit I think when 4 teams go in knowing there's only one spot in the next Division available.

Great idea I reckon. How hot would a GF be if the top side goes out in straight sets and 2 other teams are playing for the 1 spot!! I think you need to reward the team who has been the best through out the year and dangle the carrot for the rest!!